IHRA Side Impact Working Group Status Report GRSP, December 2002

What is IHRA? International Harmonised Research Activities formed at 15th ESV in Melbourne 1996 Steering committee made up of international government vehicle safety regulators 5 Working Groups to coordinate research in major problem areas of road safety Progress reviewed at every ESV INTERNATIONAL HARMONISED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES WAS FORMED DURING THE 1996 MELBOURNE ESV TO WORK TOWARDS AN AGREED RESEARCH AGENDA TO AVOID DUPLICATION OF VEHICLE SAFETY RESEARCH. IT WAS AGREED THAT IHRA COORDINATE RESEARCH ACTIVITES IN 6 KEY AREAS: FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE ADVANCED FRONTAL CRASH PROTECTION VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY BIOMECHANICS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS ATER THE 1998 ESV, THE SIDE IMPACT WORKING GROUP WAS FORMED TO REPLACE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE

IHRA Working Groups Side Impact (Australia) Vehicle Compatibility (UK/EEVC) Biomechanics (NHTSA/USA) Pedestrian Safety (JMLIT,Japan) Intelligent Transport Systems (Transport Canada) INTERNATIONAL HARMONISED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES WAS FORMED DURING THE 1996 MELBOURNE ESV TO WORK TOWARDS AN AGREED RESEARCH AGENDA TO AVOID DUPLICATION OF VEHICLE SAFETY RESEARCH. IT WAS AGREED THAT IHRA COORDINATE RESEARCH ACTIVITES IN 6 KEY AREAS: FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE ADVANCED FRONTAL CRASH PROTECTION VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY BIOMECHANICS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS ATER THE 1998 ESV, THE SIDE IMPACT WORKING GROUP WAS FORMED TO REPLACE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE

IHRA Side Impact Working Group Side Impact Working Group formed after 1998 ESV has around 10 members to enhance likelihood of progress Governments of Europe, USA, Canada, Australia and Japan represented. 3 Industry experts from OICA one each from North America, Europe and Asia-Pacific INTERNATIONAL HARMONISED RESEARCH ACTIVITIES WAS FORMED DURING THE 1996 MELBOURNE ESV TO WORK TOWARDS AN AGREED RESEARCH AGENDA TO AVOID DUPLICATION OF VEHICLE SAFETY RESEARCH. IT WAS AGREED THAT IHRA COORDINATE RESEARCH ACTIVITES IN 6 KEY AREAS: FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE ADVANCED FRONTAL CRASH PROTECTION VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY BIOMECHANICS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS ATER THE 1998 ESV, THE SIDE IMPACT WORKING GROUP WAS FORMED TO REPLACE FUNCTIONAL EQUIVALENCE

SIWG - Terms of Reference The terms of reference of the SIWG is to co-ordinate research worldwide to support the development of future side impact test procedures to maximise harmonisation with the objective of enhancing safety in real world side crashes. THE TERMS OF REFERENCE OF THE SIWG IS TO CO-ORDINATE RESEARCH WORLDWIDE TO SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF FUTURE SIDE IMPACT TEST PROCEDURE(S) TO MAXIMISE HARMONISATION WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF ENHANCING SAFETY IN REAL WORLD SIDE CRASHES. THIS WOULD INCLUDE: REVIEW OF REAL WORLD CRASH DATA TO PRIORITISE INJURY MECHANISMS AND IDENTIFY ASSOCIATED CRASH CONDITIONS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT LIKELY FUTURE TRENDS. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE NEED TO PROTECT BOTH FRONT SEAT AND REAR SEAT(S) ADULT AND CHILD OCCUPANTS. INTERACTION WITH THE IHRA BIOMECHANICS WORKING GROUP TO MONITOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF HARMONISED INJURY CRITERIA. INTERACTION WITH THE IHRA OFFSET FRONTAL AND VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY WORKING GROUPS TO ENSURE SOLUTIONS IN ONE AREA DO NOT DEGRADE SAFETY IN ANOTHER.

Interaction with Other Researchers WorldSID Task Group, IHRA Compatibility and Biomechanics WGs kept informed on progress of SIWG Need to ensure that: harmonised test device and injury criteria available countermeasures in one area do not degrade safety in another THERE IS STRONG SUPPORT FOR IHRA TO CONTINUE 2 OF THE MAIN POINTS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS ARE THAT GOVERNEMENTS MUST BE PREPARED TO : PROVIDE IHRA SPECIFIC RESOURCES DEVELOP IHRA OUTCOMES INTO HARMONISED REGULATIONS

Proposed Test Procedures Accident data indicated test procedures required in 4 areas: Mobile Deformable Barrier to vehicle test Vehicle to pole test Out-of-position side airbag evaluation Sub-systems head impact test

Mobile Deformable Barrier Test Most challenging task for the group Main difficulty due to differences in fleet composition around the world Passenger cars predominate globally LTVs make up a large proportion of North American fleet 2 MDB tests proposed regulators to choose DEFINING THE PARAMETERS OF THE MOBILE DEFORMABLE BARRIER (MDB) TEST HAS PROVEN TO BE THE MOST CHALLENGING TASK FOR THE GROUP. THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN PROPOSED: LONGITUDINAL VELOCITY COMPONENT OF THE TROLLEY WILL BE 50 KM/H. SMALL ADULT FEMALE DRIVER DUMMY. ADVICE WILL BE SOUGHT FROM THE IHRA BIOMECHANICS GROUP ON A RECOMMENDATION ON THE BEST DUMMY TO USE. DUMMY(IES) TO BE BELTED.

MDB Test 1 - AE-MDB New deformable barrier element (passenger car bullet) Based on Advanced European (AE) - MDB being developed by EEVC and assisted by Japan Small female dummy in driver’s seat (min.) Targeting - centreline of MDB 250 mm rear of R-point HOWEVER, THERE ARE STILL SOME SIGNIFICANT ISSUES THAT HAVE NOT BEEN DETERMINED AND WILL REQUIRE FURTHER RESEARCH: NEED FOR A REAR DUMMY? SHOULD THE TROLLEY IMPACT THE VEHICLE “CRABBED” OR PERPENDICULARLY? SHOULD THE DEFORMABLE BARRIER BE HOMOGENEOUS OR TRY TO REPRESENT A REAL VEHICLE (NON-HOMOGENEOUS)? STIFFNESS OF DEFORMABLE BARRIER? MASS OF TROLLEY? GROUND CLEARANCE AND GEOMETRY OF DEFORMABLE BARRIER? SHOULD THERE BE A NON-STRUCK SIDE TEST? DRIVER SEAT TRACK POSITION? ALIGNMENT OF TROLLEY.

MDB Test 1 - AE-MDB Impact speed 50 km/h Perpendicular impact Regulation R95 trolley Mass of trolley - 1500 kg WHILE TIME DOIES NOT PERMIT DETAILED DISCUSSION OF ALL THESE PARAMETERS (I WOULD REFER YOU TO THE ESV PAPER ITSELF AND SOME PRESENTATIONS YOU WILL HEAR THIS MORNING), IT IS USEFUL TO LOOK AT A NUMBER OF THESE. FIRSTLY , STIFFNESS. STIFFNESS OF THE BULLET VEHICLE ITSELF DOES NOT SEEM TO MAKE A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE - SINCE THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE IN THE STIFFNESS OF FRONT AND SIDE STRUCTURES IN VEHICLES. HOWEVER, STIFFNESS DISTRIBUTION DOES. THIS WOULD SUPPORT THE USE OF A NON-HOMOGENEOUS DEFORMABLE BARRIER. ANOTHER QUESTION IS WHETHER ONLY INITIAL STIFFNESS IS IMPORTANT SINCE THERE IS LITTLE CRUSH OF THE BULLET VEHICLE

Test 1 - AE-MDB 60mm. 50mm 150mm 200mm 250mm 500mm

MDB Test 2 - High Geometry MDB Based on IIHS MDB test Mass of trolley - 1500 kg modified FMVSS 214 trolley Perpendicular impact at 50 km/h Small female dummy in front and rear seats on struck side SECONDLY - TROLLEY MASS THE TROLLEY MASS IS UNDECIDED BUT THIS SLIDE PROVIDES AN INDOCATION OF THE VARIOUS FLEET MASSES AROUND THE WORLD

MDB Test 2 - IIHS MDB

Pole Test Moving vehicle to pole test Oblique impact at 15 degrees load head and thorax simultaneously Impact speed 32 km/h Evaluate at least head, thorax & abdomen Mid size male [WorldSID] Rigid pole 254 mm diameter

Out-of-position side airbag evaluation NHTSA and Transport Canada tasked to review current research including ISO TR 14933, NHTSA, Transport Canada, IIHS and industry research Focussed principally on the risk of injury to small women, adolescents, and children THERE HAS BEEN RESEARCH DONE BY ISO, NHTSA, TRANSPORT CANADA AND IIHS NHTA AND TRANSPORT CANADA ARE TO REVIEW CURRENT RESEARCH AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION

Out-of-position side airbag evaluation A standard set of static deployment test procedures (occupant positions) for assessing side airbag inflation injury risk associated with various side airbag designs. THERE HAS BEEN RESEARCH DONE BY ISO, NHTSA, TRANSPORT CANADA AND IIHS NHTA AND TRANSPORT CANADA ARE TO REVIEW CURRENT RESEARCH AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION

Out-of-position side airbag evaluation Test devices best suited for assessing injury risk from the close-range deployment of side airbags Hybrid III 5th female, 6-yo, 3-yo SID IIs Performance criteria to assess the injury risk measured by the test devices. THERE HAS BEEN RESEARCH DONE BY ISO, NHTSA, TRANSPORT CANADA AND IIHS NHTA AND TRANSPORT CANADA ARE TO REVIEW CURRENT RESEARCH AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION

Sub-Systems Head Impact Test Based on FMVSS and EEVC interior headform test procedure Uses Free Motion Headform (FMH) Points limited to those struck in side impact may include non-struck side Same exemptions for airbag-equipped cars as FMVSS 201 BASED ON FMVSS 201 ALSO NEW RESEARCH FROM EEVC

Next Steps SIWG meeting in March 2003 to finalise details of draft test procedures Final report to IHRA Steering Committee just prior to ESV Presentation of draft test procedures at beginning of Side Impact Technical Session at 2003 ESV THERE IS STRONG SUPPORT FOR IHRA TO CONTINUE 2 OF THE MAIN POINTS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS ARE THAT GOVERNEMENTS MUST BE PREPARED TO : PROVIDE IHRA SPECIFIC RESOURCES DEVELOP IHRA OUTCOMES INTO HARMONISED REGULATIONS

Next Steps SIWG to guide validation phase for test procedures between 2003 and 2005 ESV and look into developing a test procedure for reducing non-struck side injuries Submit for consideration a draft Global Technical Regulation for side impact protection after 2005 ESV THERE IS STRONG SUPPORT FOR IHRA TO CONTINUE 2 OF THE MAIN POINTS RAISED BY PARTICIPANTS ARE THAT GOVERNEMENTS MUST BE PREPARED TO : PROVIDE IHRA SPECIFIC RESOURCES DEVELOP IHRA OUTCOMES INTO HARMONISED REGULATIONS

THANK YOU